 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois Labreque wrote:
>
> Very nice.
>
> how did you get the motion blur on the ground?
It's an averaged pigment of about twenty looped granite textures,
stretched and translated.
-Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
> Nice!
Thanks!
> I like the softness of the edges of the spaceship, is this focal blur or some
> kind of neat trick? And how did you do those light glows? The ship really looks
> almost hand-drawn, it's got a very nice feel to it.
I used focal blur, yes, but it helps tremendously that I made the ship
mostly out of superellipsoids. The wings are unevenly scaled spheres.
For the lights, I just declared a union comprised of a superellisoid and
a sphere with emitting media. It has a spherical density, of course.
-Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
marabou wrote:
> star warz - return of the sam knights...
> be careful that no rock will stop your invasion...
All it takes is one stray asteroid.....
> fog+motion blur+isosurface?
No isosurfaces were used. All basic csg.
-Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Andrew Wilcox wrote:
> I like the whole image. There's only one thing that bothers me. The ground
> or water likes very good, but the ships shadow looks very flat on it, which
> ruins the illusion for me.
It's supposed to be ground... sometimes my ground planes look like
water, I guess :) I don't particularly like the flat shadow either, but
I think the ground plane would look flat regardless. There's no easier
way to make motion_blur effects than on a flat surface....
-Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 18:09:46 -0700, Samuel Benge <stb### [at] hotmail com>
wrote:
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>--------------090401060100040200050406
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Hello everyone. Here's a little something I whipped up today. Hope you
>enjoy it!
>
Oh my! That just totally kicks ass. I love
the camera tilt. I love the ship (plane?)
Wow.
--
to all the companies who wait until a large user base becomes
dependant on their freeware, then shafting said happy campers with
mandatory payment for continued usage. I spit on your grave.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Samuel Benge" <stb### [at] hotmailcom> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:40D### [at] hotmailcom...
> Hello everyone. Here's a little something I whipped up today. Hope you
> enjoy it!
>
> -Sam Benge
>
wooah, nice....
Can it be animated?
Just 10 seconds or so, some rocks passing by,
the ship shaking in a turbulence ...
jsj
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
povray wrote:
>>
>
> Oh my! That just totally kicks ass. I love
> the camera tilt. I love the ship (plane?)
> Wow.
>
Thanks!
-Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Josef Schmid wrote:
> wooah, nice....
> Can it be animated?
> Just 10 seconds or so, some rocks passing by,
> the ship shaking in a turbulence ...
>
> jsj
>
It can be animated if somebody is willing to animate it..... I'm not. I
could give out the messy source code for that purpose....
-Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Samuel Benge wrote:
> marabou wrote:
>> fog+motion blur+isosurface?
>
> No isosurfaces were used. All basic csg.
>
for mountains as well?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
marabou wrote:
> Samuel Benge wrote:
>
>
>>marabou wrote:
>>
>
>>>fog+motion blur+isosurface?
>>>
>>
>>No isosurfaces were used. All basic csg.
>>
>>
>
> for mountains as well?
I guess I consider height fields 'basic' csg :)
-Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
